Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

The pr stunt ,which is the right word for the first ground action in Afghanistan, is over. The US forces was surprised of the though resistance they met . Did they belive this would be a walk in the park. If they dont change their views on the opposition they gonna meet they will suffer large casualties

remember Russia...

We will smack Afghanistan!

well the russians were in a different situation. They fought a united Afghan opposition, not the case now. And To I hope you ment Taliban regime and not Afghanistan

Of course that's what I meant. You have to remember, it's 2AM here, and I'm tired.

I don't think we underestimate our enemy. Bush said it will take a LONG time, and cost MANY lives. We know it's not going to be over in a few months. He was talking in terms of years.

before or after they had the troops there?

He said that on September 11th, when he addressed the nation.

and now there was someone saying that they will probably never find OBN... why the attack then?

No one said that. They said it is like "finding a needle in a haystack." They never said they'll never find him. He's gotta come out of his cave sooner or later, even if it's in five years.

Besides, killing bin Ladin won't end terrorism. That's why we are wiping all of it out, which is why it will take so long. Ladin AND all of his followers must pay for what they've done.

also women and children....
And besides: 5 years? yeah right! remember that he finance Afghanistan and that captioring will not be easy, they have to wipe out most of Afghanistan...

6,000 innocent people were killed September 11th.

If Afghanistan decides to hide bin Ladin, then they must be destroyed too. Bush has warned REPEATEDLY that we will not tolorate harboring these terrorists.

We've given the Taliban dozens of warnings to hand over bin Ladin, and they havn't. So, we had to use force. And even several days ago, Bush asked them to hand him over, and we would stop the bombings, but they didn't hand him over. They just don't get it.

It sucks that innocent people are dying. But America and the Brittish arn't killing them on purpose. Remember that America is dropping food and supplies daily into Afghanistan for the civillians.

there are every day people that get's killed, because it is now in the USA you hear about it:
Somalia, Timor, Indonesia, DR Congo,...

Now you are saying that it is JUSTIFIED to kill innocent people who don't even KNOW what happend september 11? Killing women and children because 5 mans decided NOT to exile OBN???

American forces WERE surprised by the strength of opposition. Pentagon said so. It's part of why they have asked for SAS squadrons to help.

The Russians were really in the same situation, Finti. The Mujihadeen may have vaguely unified against the Russians but in broad terms the country was just as divided as it is now.

Great. Now the Taliban have caught and killed Abdul Haq, America's choice to unify the resistance. It had already been in serious trouble because Haq, despite being one of the biggest haters of the Taliban, had condemned the American bombing campighn. another example of how removed the US is from the Northern Alliance.

The bombing does seem to have achieved nothing other than alienating the entire Arab world. I hope it is later shown to have had some positive effects.

And I know the US means well with the food packagaes, but it really isn't helping. I mean, they will eat the food but it won't make them like you. Ask a few Londoners from the war whether they would have liked the Germans more if they had also dropped food during the blitz. Of course they wouldn't! And I know the Taliban aren't exactly popular out there but once you start bombing a country they hate you no matter how much food you drop as well.

.......and they've bombed another Red Cross food shelter

do you think you're wiping all terrorists out? do you not think that the extremists in pakistan and other neighbour countries, are pissed off at US, and are possible terrorists. o
one guy on the news said "the people in afghanistan who earlier were against the Taliban, now have forgotten that and just wants to defend their country, because of the attacks".

i am really not happy with this bombing, not at all, and i don't have the slightest faith in ''the worlds most powerful man'', president bush. he's a jack-ass.

mah, that is a BOLD statement.

President George Bush is an elected president. Calling him a jack-ass is calling the American people jack-asses for voting him to office.

Of course Afghanies are going to be angry when their homes get ACCIDENTALLY bombed. In no way, is the US trying to kill innocent people. If they didn't give a shit, then we would drop a nuke on the entire country. We are NOT doing that, we are dropping supplies on the innocent. And the bastard Taliban is confiscating those supplies.

Honestly, what are we supposed to do? Should we sit here, and say "Wow, you guys got us! You attacked a business building without warning, you sure caught us by surprise! Our bad!" Give me a F*#@ing break!

We WILL find those terrorists. We WILL hold them responsible. We WILL kill them. Don't EVER, EVER have sympothy for these sons of bitches. They should die for their actions.

America, and those who support us, will WIPE OUT TERRORISM. I have no doubts. God damnit! I am a citzen of the United States of America, and we WILL NOT FAIL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

last thing I heared was that Gore won the elections with the stuff in Florida...

accidently bombed? I don't know about you but if you bomb the Chinese ambassy and than a few years later you accidently bomb houses...

and mind you there WAS a warning of OBN in 1997 or 1998 that there would be an action around 2000 of him that would shock the world...

little question: if you kill terrorists, where would that leave you? than you are no better than they are...

PS: I'm NOT defending them!

ToMacco:
i don't know why you elected bush, it's a mystery to me. i'm sure your not jack-asses, and i understand that you support these actions, you're angry, pissed off, and want revenge the easiest way, with violence. but i can still say that i don't like it, it has done no good so far, and it won't, i think.

but all this praising of war, "blow'em all away"-business is scaring me a bit. terrorists excists in about every country, will you bomb them too?
does anger justify killing innocent? if i slap you, will you slap uncontrolled and hit yerssot too?

war is not a way to destroy war.

ToMacco, that statement you made abouit Mah is way off. He can call Bush a jack-ass if he wants and its not a comment about the American people in any way (more of whom, in any case, voted for Gore). Indeed, I know for a fact that some US posters around here are ardent Democrats and cannot stand the man. So don't accuse him of insulting your entire country just because he expresses an opinion that many others, includingnthose in your own country, also share.

And even if he had got 100% of the vote, any public leader, especially one from the world's superpower, is subject to criticism worldwide, and it STILL wouldn't be an indictment of the people who voted him into office. And Mah is simply voicing an opinion that is very common in the Continent; Bush is simply not popular in Europe. People have been rapidly warming to him in the UK, though.

Now. To get down to cases. First of all, Tomacco, do not totally dismiss the idea of a peaceful solution to a terrorsit situation- after all, that's what we are up to in Northern Ireland, not least, I may add, because there was a lot of pressure from your country to stop the violence. SO don;t TOTALLY dismiss it; I get the idea that you think a peaceful solution is utterly ludicrous when it;s not actually that strange.

HOWEVER, at this point in time the military solution is the only appropriate one, I feel, so so do the heads of most Western Governments. This is becase 1. a clear threat still exists and 2. a negotiated solution is currently impossible. It is impossible because a. of a complete foregin policy failure from the US to Central Asia over the last two decades, but no use crying over spilt milk, and b. because the US could no more withdraw from Israel than it could hack off its own right foot.

So I support the action, in broad terms, but the point still is that it is not going particularly well right now., The Taliban are surprised at how ineffective it is, the people, food parcels or no, are hating you more and more, innocent people are dying (an inevitable consequence, to be sure, but they seem to be dying without ANYTHING being achieved!), the Northern Alliance is losing patience, the entire Arab world is turning against you and frankly the whole coalition will fall apart unless something more decsiive is done soon!

Anyway, yes, I hope this is successful and I hope that all terrorism is, indeed, wiped out. With any luck this bobmbing campign will turn out in tretrospect to be more effective than it looks now, because right now it is looking like an own goal.

little note their Ush:
you've put a lot of you (refering to To) there, but it's not only To who supports the attacks, I think that it is better that you write USA or something like that instead.
I know it sounds stupid and is off-topic but I mean... it was strange for me to read it

No idea what you are talking about, yers. I think you are just reading it wrong.

nothing important, but I had the feeling that you compared him with Bush and that he was the guy who did the wrong stuff...

What did you all think was going to happen? Bombs miss targets..it's a fact of life. This is war..this is what happens. It might very well be a PR campaign but I do think that something had to happen in reaction to Sept 11th.. And the way I look at it is that we really should have stepped up to the plate as far as Taliban goes a long time ago. It kind of reminds me of how we didn't want to get involved with what Hitler was doing until we ended up getting bombed in 1941.

I think we do need to find Bin Ladin because that was the whole point ( I figured that the Bush admin would end up saying that it might not be possible) and I think the best thing to do as far as Afganistan is concerned we should put the king and his people back in charge and get out of dodge..if we can get rid of the Taliban of course.

You can't just push in, mess things up and then leave it. That's what happened last time.

Okay so maybe I don't really mean leave it..but I don't think that an USA set up goverment is the right thing..I think the Afghani people need to decide where they want to go and I think the king is the best person to take them though that transition.

Only he's a bit out of touch.

I think getting the UN to handle this is the best idea. Once the current situation is over.

i think getting the UN to handle this is the best idea. NOW.

NOW and nothing would ever get done.

Couldn't be more true.
War will always bring casualties and often innocent ones thats just the way it is. If the Taliban are so sure of winning why are the hiding and let innocent take the rap???

I agree with peace. We gave the Taliban an entire month to give over bin Ladin before we attacked. Then, Bush gave them another chance in the middle of that attacks, they still didn't hand him over.

I wish we could always live in peace, but these people want Americans destroyed, and you can't talk peace with them.

Well, to be more accurate, what they want is AMericnas to stay out the Holy Land, but negotiations are still near impossible at this point.